a. As a developer I think it is a good idea to lower barriers for code
b. IANAL, but this "signature/certification" is not identical to the
existing CLA, which I think has special statement about patents. Seems like
the new model is a bit more relaxed. Does it mean that OMPI amends existing
CLA ? If not - what is the relation between the two. Most likely existing
member would have to take the "new" CLA to the legal for a review.
On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 8:38 AM, George Bosilca <bosi...@icl.utk.edu> wrote:
> Yes, my understanding is that unsystematic contributors will not have to
> sign the contributor agreement, but instead will have to provide a signed
> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 9:29 AM, Pavel Shamis <pasharesea...@gmail.com>
>> Does it mean that contributors don't have to sign contributor agreement ?
>> On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 2:35 PM, Geoffrey Paulsen <gpaul...@us.ibm.com>
>>> We have been discussing new Bylaws for the Open MPI Community. The
>>> primary motivator is to allow non-members to commit code. Details in the
>>> proposal (link below).
>>> Old Bylaws / Procedures: https://github.com/open-mpi/om
>>> New Bylaws proposal: https://github.com/open-mpi/om
>>> Open MPI members will be voting on October 25th. Please voice any
>>> comments or concerns.
>>> devel mailing list
>> devel mailing list
> devel mailing list
devel mailing list